However, regarding VDARE.com’s central subject of immigration, I’m unaware that Prager has ever shown much interest or concern. In fact, the late, greatly-lamented Terry Anderson, whose Sunday-evening talk-radio program in Los Angeles was laser-focused on illegal immigration, once told me that Prager had declined to meet with him, even though they shared the same “home” station, KRLA-AM.

I am writing this column in Japan, a country whose crime rate is the lowest among countries with large populations. I asked my Japanese translator, a middle-aged woman, what she thought.

“Why is there is so little crime in Japan?” I asked.

Without taking a moment to reflect, she responded, “Because we don’t allow immigration.”

Anyone who visits Japan is struck by the ethnic homogeneity of the nation. If you meet a Caucasian, a black or a Hispanic in Japan, you can be all but certain that the person is visiting or studying there, not a citizen.

I wonder if Prager’s head exploded—maybe just a little?—when he heard those magic words “Because we don’t allow immigration.” Of course, this concept isn’t news, as Jared Taylor (who spent much of his youth in Japan) has covered it repeatedly (e.g. at VDARE.com in 2003 and in 2011)

Anyway, Prager continued on, seemingly unperturbed:

Likewise in the United States, there is direct correlation between ethnic homogeneity and low levels of violence. According to 2016-2017 data, the four states with the lowest percentages of violence are:

Vermont — where 95 percent of the population is one race (white).

Maine — where 95 percent of the population is one race (white).

Wyoming — where roughly 93 percent of the population is one race (white).

New Hampshire — where roughly 94 percent of the population is one race (white).

Sweden, which for much of its modern history has had among the world’s lowest rates of violent crime, was almost always as homogenous as Japan. Now that it has admitted hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa, it is no longer a homogenous country, and its levels of violence have increased dramatically.

All this leads to a particular rule, which is, in order to maintain a low crime rate and social stability, a country has only two choices: Do not allow immigrants into the country, or allow immigrants into the country, but be certain to assimilate them into the native population as quickly as possible.

The eclipse of assimilation is the main subject of the brief (about 720 words) piece, and Prager concludes with:

If you want to understand the immigration crisis, just know that because the left has undone the second choice, it has made the first choice — Japan’s choice — look tenable to many for the first time in American history.

Still dangling is the matter of numbers: Even if we get immigrants who assimilate, how many should we accept? It’s likely a bridge too far to hope that Prager will, anytime soon, combine those critical words from the Constitution’s Preamble, “… secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity …, with an observation of 2017’s facts on the ground to conclude that WE REALLY DON’T NEED IMMIGRATION AT ALL.